See Evolution, at many places.
Re analogies, mistaken analogies, language games, etc., see esp. Evolution, p 286, 287; Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations, Index, "mistaken analogies".
How would one distinguish, methodologically or intellectually, between fruitful and mistaken analogies, as between analogies between solved problems and those unsolved, or between an analogy expressing a superficial common feature expressing nothing, from an analogy exposing essential common features hidden beneath a surface of external differences?
How?
I find that others have already seen what I see:
https://philpapers.org/rec/PENTIO-2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_TpV6UqssQ
http://www.dif.unige.it/epi/hp/penco/pub/einsteinwitt.pdf
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/phin.12232
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-27569-3_19
No comments:
Post a Comment